The Freeman Movement and England

[Edx]

@Especially: And 911 was an inside job I suppose blah blah blah.

edit: whoa didnt see the date on the first post. oops

 

[LightinDarkness]

Here is yet another "successful" use of FOTL woo, this time recorded by a woo in Ireland (I'm not even sure thats legal - but I don't know Irish law about recordings in the court room). Sound quality is bad but the "Freeman" provided us a translation and interspersed it with his Freeman woo:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6DX7ZI7S60w&feature=player_embedded#


So what do we have here. A freeman was arrested for sitting on the grass (apparently in an area where you are not supposed to do that) - a minor and insignificant charge we'd all agree. A simple matter of paying the fine...

Oh no, not if your a freeman on the land.

You see, us normal enslaved sheeple would simply pay the charge and move along with our lives.

The freeman on the land demands a trial, get held in contempt of court because he kept telling the judge he is not a MR (when the court tried to address him as MR, since that is acknowledging the legal fiction in FOTL woo instead of simply being a courtesy title as it is in reality), the contempt attempt DOES get purged but ONLY after he apologizes (after being held in a cell for 3 hours and refusing to do so), etc. He also refuses to enter a plea (as a freeman does not "beg" the court ofc, etc.) He does ALL of the magical legal woo, and the result is STILL WORSE than just admitting you did something against the law and paying for it.

Which one is more free, the FOTL woo being held in contempt or the sheeple to that acknowledges breaking a (admittedly minor) law and walks free?

Why do FOTL woos insist on continuing to engage in magical legal rituals that do not exist which only puts themselves in worse positions than they would be if they just followed the actual law (as it exists in reality)?

 

[Edx]

Why do FOTL woos insist on continuing to engage in magical legal rituals that do not exist which only puts themselves in worse positions than they would be if they just followed the actual law (as it exists in reality)?

If they are stupid enough to believe it they deserve it IMO

 

[Guybrush Threepwood]

Here is yet another "successful" use of FOTL woo, this time recorded by a woo in Ireland (I'm not even sure thats legal - but I don't know Irish law about recordings in the court room). Sound quality is bad but the "Freeman" provided us a translation and interspersed it with his Freeman woo:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6DX7ZI7S60w&feature=player_embedded#


So what do we have here. A freeman was arrested for sitting on the grass (apparently in an area where you are not supposed to do that) - a minor and insignificant charge we'd all agree. A simple matter of paying the fine...

Oh no, not if your a freeman on the land.

You see, us normal enslaved sheeple would simply pay the charge and move along with our lives.

The freeman on the land demands a trial, get held in contempt of court because he kept telling the judge he is not a MR (when the court tried to address him as MR, since that is acknowledging the legal fiction in FOTL woo instead of simply being a courtesy title as it is in reality), the contempt attempt DOES get purged but ONLY after he apologizes (after being held in a cell for 3 hours and refusing to do so), etc. He also refuses to enter a plea (as a freeman does not "beg" the court ofc, etc.) He does ALL of the magical legal woo, and the result is STILL WORSE than just admitting you did something against the law and paying for it.

Which one is more free, the FOTL woo being held in contempt or the sheeple to that acknowledges breaking a (admittedly minor) law and walks free?

Why do FOTL woos insist on continuing to engage in magical legal rituals that do not exist which only puts themselves in worse positions than they would be if they just followed the actual law (as it exists in reality)?

Alright, you're on the list for that post. I had thought this country was free of these nutjobs, but now thanks to the link in that video I know it isn't. Things will never be quite the same again.

 

[drkitten]

Here is yet another "successful" use of FOTL woo, this time recorded by a woo in Ireland.

The freeman on the land demands a trial, get held in contempt of court because he kept telling the judge he is not a MR (when the court tried to address him as MR, since that is acknowledging the legal fiction in FOTL woo instead of simply being a courtesy title as it is in reality), the contempt attempt DOES get purged but ONLY after he apologizes (after being held in a cell for 3 hours and refusing to do so), etc. He also refuses to enter a plea (as a freeman does not "beg" the court ofc, etc.) He does ALL of the magical legal woo, and the result is STILL WORSE than just admitting you did something against the law and paying for it.

I love the bit at the end. "I'm remanding this case until the 29th of October to permit you to get legal advice. You are therefore released on bond until that date. You are required to appear on this date; if you do not appear, yadda yadda yadda

"So I'm free to go?"

"Free to go until the 29th of October, yes."

So he walks out a "free" man....

[evil grin]

 

[TokeyDokey]

As I have been following this thread and not posting, I have a few questions.

- How many of you are qualified lawyers, or otherwise employed in a legal profession?

- How many are journalists?

- Has anyone here tried and been burnt by these woo tactics, as you call them? (I have been following most of the links already posted)

Now, a comment;

Mary Elizabeth Croft is a complete and utter whack-job. That is agreed, and not disputed. Everything has not already been paid for. That's the dumbest thing I've ever heard.

 

[joe911]

- How many of you are qualified lawyers, or otherwise employed in a legal profession?

One of my closest friends is a lawyer. He laughed and said its the craziest bs he's ever heard. He told his boss about it [who has been a lawyer for 30 years] said the same thing.

 

[TokeyDokey]

One of my closest friends is a lawyer. He laughed and said its the craziest bs he's ever heard. He told his boss about it [who has been a lawyer for 30 years] said the same thing.

Thanks for your comment Joe, but wether you're a Freeman, lawyer, painter or judge, we all know for an opinion to be valid, it's gotta come from the horse's mouth, or is veiwed as hearsay, please don't misconstrue that as an offensive remark, that was not it's intent.

I just want to hear what a professional has to say on the matter.

 

[TjW]

Thanks for your comment Joe, but wether you're a Freeman, lawyer, painter or judge, we all know for an opinion to be valid, it's gotta come from the horse's mouth, or is veiwed as hearsay, please don't misconstrue that as an offensive remark, that was not it's intent.

I just want to hear what a professional has to say on the matter.

Lash L is a lawyer. If you read the thread, you would have some idea of her opinion. You might even use the search tools to find the posts she's made.

Of course, from the POV of the FOTL movement, having gone to law school would disqualify her, wouldn't it? Wouldn't all the lawyers have to be either very naive or complicit for the claims to be true?

 

[RHolmes]

I'm an English lawyer. FOTL is ********.

 

[jimbob]

I'm an English lawyer. FOTL is ********.

But you are only saying it because judges in at least the US, UK and Canada agree with you:

ETA: And because it is self-evidently multiple asterisks

A recent FOTLer fail: http://www.loweringthebar.net/2009/...-with-online-research-must-pay-jury-fees.html

A couple of others are linked from it, one of which is titled Surprising Court Loss for Woman Who Challenged State's Authority to Require Driver's License.

I didn't ask for court proof; I asked for documentation. Where is it? Has no one ever video-taped an encounter with the police where your strategy succeeds? Is all you have really post-hoc anecdotes? C'mon. This is a sceptics' site. We require more than that to be convinced.

I also asked you to elaborate on your interpretation of s. 15 of the Criminal Code. Can you do that?

I'm guessing that you don't want to talk about Canadian court cases because you know they have been complete failures. For example, you tried but failed to use FOTL arguments to get intervenor status in United States of America v. Emery, et al.

http://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcsc/doc/2005/2005bcsc1192/2005bcsc1192.html

And the Sponagles from Nova Scotia, in Jabez Financial Services Inc. v. Sponagle, failed utterly with their attempt to respond to a discovery order with a FOTL "Notice of Understanding and Intent and Claim of Right". Doing this caused the judge to strike their defence, granting default judgement to the plaintiffs. One wonders where they got their FOTL legal documents, eh? They didn't purchase them from you by chance, did they?

http://www.canlii.org/en/ns/nssc/doc/2008/2008nssc112/2008nssc112.html


Another anecdote? How underwhelming. Document this actually happening and you might have something interesting to talk about. It's not that hard in this day and age of ubiquitous cellphone cameras.

Yeah, we wouldn't want to cut into your income from your fraudulent legal advice, now would we?

http://www.thinkfree.ca/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=18&Itemid=30

I like the quotation marks the judge puts around the Sponagles' "representations" and "position".

 

[Mojo]

Thanks for your comment Joe, but wether you're a Freeman, lawyer, painter or judge, we all know for an opinion to be valid, it's gotta come from the horse's mouth, or is veiwed as hearsay, please don't misconstrue that as an offensive remark, that was not it's intent.

I just want to hear what a professional has to say on the matter.

I'd just like the proponents of this nonsense to give citations for the documents that they claim support their position.

 

[fromdownunder]

Thanks for your comment Joe, but wether you're a Freeman, lawyer, painter or judge, we all know for an opinion to be valid, it's gotta come from the horse's mouth, or is veiwed as hearsay, please don't misconstrue that as an offensive remark, that was not it's intent.

I just want to hear what a professional has to say on the matter.

I am not a professional, but I did study law, and one of the most important subjects - ILM, - "Introduction to the Legal Method" teaches one how to research the law.

Five minutes research and a good memory shows that their most basic premise - what they believe the Common Law is, compared to what it actually is, is so utterly, incredibly, stupidly flawed that everything that flows from this premise, i.e. pretty much all of FOTL is a nonsense.

Their version of the common law is some ancient mystical natural rights thingy, when in fact major common law decisions have been made up until very recent times, and in fact can still be made, and most Statute Law (which they argue is NOT law) is actually nothing more than a codified version of Common Law judicial decisions - precedents.

Norm

 

[Toke]

Here is yet another "successful" use of FOTL woo, this time recorded by a woo in Ireland (I'm not even sure thats legal - but I don't know Irish law about recordings in the court room). Sound quality is bad but the "Freeman" provided us a translation and interspersed it with his Freeman woo:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6DX7Z...ayer_embedded#

I can't really hear what is going on, but the subtitling is incredible.
That is, I find it hard to comprehend that anyone would go through with it in a real court.

A few months ago I looked at the "Get out of debt free" homepage where you can get 3 magic letters to the bank regarding mortgage. I did not read more than the first, the others were free to, as soon as you had donated some money.

The essence were something like "unless you can document the debt in these specific manners I consider it void"
I wonder how my banker would look in the face if I showed it to her.

 

[TokeyDokey]

I'd just like the proponents of this nonsense to give citations for the documents that they claim support their position.

I agree, I want to see some proof before I start sending letters to people that might make them think I'm crazy.

 

[TokeyDokey]

Of course, from the POV of the FOTL movement, having gone to law school would disqualify her, wouldn't it? Wouldn't all the lawyers have to be either very naive or complicit for the claims to be true?

Please, you misunderstand, I'm a fellow skeptic, and not a FMOTL or a Strawman or whatever the hell they think they are. But some of them make some pretty serious acusations of our law and governments, so I'm simply trying to get an informed opinion, and take an objective look at what's going on here.

Someone is defrauding someone else, and therein lies the potential for serious harm to be caused. If people are trying this stuff and getting locked up, or losing their houses or marriages then we should all be seriously concerned and attempt to bring these wooers to justice. But IF, somehow these people are right (governments have done terrible things before and no one believed it was possible) then we ALSO have a responsibility to bring it to light.

"No society can exist unless the laws are respected to a certain
degree. The safest way to make laws respected is to make
them respectable. When law and morality contradict each other,
the citizen has the cruel alternative of either losing his moral
sense or losing his respect for the law." - Bastiat

 

[TokeyDokey]

I'm an English lawyer. FOTL is ********.

LMAO never a straight answer from a lawyer! What does ******** mean in Black's, I can't find it.

 

[drkitten]

Please, you misunderstand, I'm a fellow skeptic, and not a FMOTL or a Strawman or whatever the hell they think they are. But some of them make some pretty serious acusations of our law and governments, so I'm simply trying to get an informed opinion, and take an objective look at what's going on here.

Then look. If you really want a professional's opinion, you're not going to get in on an internet forum -- and shouldn't believe it if you did. Oh, of course I'm a legal professional. In fact, I'm a Supreme Court Justice myself; Justice Learned Hand (1872-1961)! Ja, rly!

What you will get on this forum is exactly what you might expect; the collective opinions of a number of experts and semi-experts, plus the secondhand genuine expertise of anyone we care to consult. If you really need to have a professional lawyer tell you that FOTL is nuts, check one of the local law schools -- and be prepared to pay through the nose.

If people are trying this stuff and getting locked up, or losing their houses or marriages then we should all be seriously concerned and attempt to bring these wooers to justice. But IF, somehow these people are right (governments have done terrible things before and no one believed it was possible) then we ALSO have a responsibility to bring it to light.

Yes, and if we really can cure cancer by wearing the right color crystal, we have a responsibility to bring that to light. But we can't. And I don't need to get a first-hand opinion from my doctor about that before I recognize that magic crystal hugging doesn't work.

Do you really think that the fringe on the flag controls the jurisdiction of a court?

Do you really think that statutes are not binding law?

Do you really think that police do not have the power to arrest people who don't consent to be arrested?

Do you really need first-hand expert opinion before rejecting these silly ideas that are integral to the FOTL mess?

 

[TokeyDokey]

Then look. If you really want a professional's opinion, you're not going to get in on an internet forum -- and shouldn't believe it if you did. Oh, of course I'm a legal professional. In fact, I'm a Supreme Court Justice myself; Justice Learned Hand (1872-1961)! Ja, rly!

What you will get on this forum is exactly what you might expect; the collective opinions of a number of experts and semi-experts, plus the secondhand genuine expertise of anyone we care to consult. If you really need to have a professional lawyer tell you that FOTL is nuts, check one of the local law schools -- and be prepared to pay through the nose.




Yes, and if we really can cure cancer by wearing the right color crystal, we have a responsibility to bring that to light. But we can't. And I don't need to get a first-hand opinion from my doctor about that before I recognize that magic crystal hugging doesn't work.

Do you really think that the fringe on the flag controls the jurisdiction of a court?

Do you really think that statutes are not binding law?

Do you really think that police do not have the power to arrest people who don't consent to be arrested?

Do you really need first-hand expert opinion before rejecting these silly ideas that are integral to the FOTL mess?

You don't have to be so rude. People can sometimes display an immaturity resembling road rage online, because they feel safe through percieved or real annonymity.

I can see this place is a waste of anyone's time, as it is just a place for people with self esteem issues to put others down to make themselves feel better.

Sorry for having taken an interest in this site.

almost 16,000 posts, you must be so proud. I wonder what your ratio of internet forum posts to hugs, kisses, and sex is.

Please do not allow me to continue to hinder you from your antisocial passive aggressive behavior. Have a nice life. I am closing my account here. At least the smilies were fun.

 

[TokeyDokey]

Do you really think that police do not have the power to arrest people who don't consent to be arrested?

Do you really think it matters if they have a gun and BELEIVE they have the right?